You seem to have some difficulty understanding what freedom of speech actually means. Here's a hint: Congress shall make no law... People telling you to shut the fuck up when you are spouting bullshit does not in any way interfere with your right to free speech. In fact, that is just those other people exercising that exact right.
Travelling to and from Switzerland from the rest of Europe was never a problem. They did have controls on their borders, though, so, theoretically you had to have a passport (though they rarely bothered checking). Now that they are part of the Schengen treaty, there will be no more routine controls on the borders between Switzerland and the rest of the Schengen countries, and you won't need a passport to go there anymore.
Please tell me you are joking. Discoveries of subitutes or other technical breakthroughs do not necessarily follow from rising prices. Economics isn't science, and your beloved free market will not always fix everything.
If you're talking about the circumcision issue, I really do not see your point. Whose privacy is being infringed upon if you prohibit circumcision of infants and child without medical necessity?
I could see how one might argue that you are infringing upon the parents rights, but even in that case, it's not really a privacy issue in my opinion. Besides, I can only see that argument working if you see a child as the personal property of its parents with which they can do as they please. To me, that doesn't make any sense. After all, parents aren't allowed to abuse their kids in a myriad of other ways, so why should this be any different?
His predecessor from the other side of the political spectrum, Otto Schily, was just as bad as Wolfgang Schaeuble.
Wait... wait.
Other side of the political spectrum? What's that supposed to mean? Schäuble is CDU, Schily was SPD. They're pretty much the same these days, except for some minor issues and the cheap attempts by the SPD to gain back a bit of favor with the people who traditionally always voted for them.
I don't believe for a second that they would do anything radically different if they were in charge.
You know, I really hate the FDP (liberals) for their twisted ideas about economic issues but they are probably our only hope for ever getting a minister of the interior who isn't a paranoid right wing nut.
Something doesn't need to actually HARM someone in every instance in order to be illegal.
And that is one of the main reasons why your current "justice system" is so fucked up (not that this wouldn't apply to other countries as well - such retarded laws exist in a lot of places).
However, there is a reason why the punishment is so disproportionate to the crime - it's because the crime is so easy to commit and there's such a small chance of being caught. The idea is that in this sort of case, as the risk of being caught is so low, the way to deter people from offending is to jack the punishment up. That changes the balance of risk back to being somewhere nearer it outweighing the benefits, thus (theoretically) convincing people not to do it. Of course, it doesn't always work, but then people still commit murder despite the risk of execution, or armed robbery, kidnapping, etc despite the risk of dying in a shoot-out with the police, etc.
In fact, it does not work at all. AFAIK, it is well proven that most people won't be kept from committing a crime by the prospect of an incredibly disproportionate punishment.
You listed some of the best examples yourself: Just because you still have the death penalty, there aren't any less murders being committed in the States than elsewhere.
Besides, even if it worked, is this theory acceptable? By its logic, as I understand it, every criminal would have to be executed, probably with some torture beforehand. That should deter most people from committing any crimes at all, right?
Now, lets assume that this would actually work to some extent. Imagine what ridiculously small thing people would get killed for. I honestly find this idea rather scary.
PS: Please don't bitch about any grammar or spelling mistakes, it's early in the morning here and I haven't had my coffee yet.
I will monitor her IM and her e-mail and everything else she does like a parent SHOULD do
If you need to monitor your kids internet activities in order to make sure they don't watch porn or violent imagery, you have already made some huge mistakes raising them. You should be able to show some trust...
No. He will only read your last statement after he has read the rest of your post. By then, he will already have been offended. Thus, your apology isn't in advance any more. Now, if you had put it at the beginning of your post, it would have been in advance.
[...]Where is the line between "stereotyping an entire culture as bad guys", versus "all the bad guys you face are from this culture"?[...]
I don't know. But GUN does neither. Not all the Indians in the game are "bad guys". Later in the game, they become your allies. I seem to remember the main character being indian (half-indian?) as well, though I'm not sure.
And in GUN, you'll almost certainly kill more whites than indians, if you actually play through the game.
I was replying to the ppl who kept claiming that no MMORPG should ever, ever include the possibility of soloing/that using Henchies in GW "defeats the purpose of playing an MMORPG" (hint: GW isn't even an actual MMORPG).
In this case, we are apparently facing horrid game design, judging by the points you mentioned. Of course, I wasn't in the beta, so I don't really know. If it forces me to play with PUGs, I definitely won't touch it, tho.
Why? There's still PvP. There is still questing with my guild. Only because henchmen are available doesn't mean you don't play with other humans anymore. It just means you aren't forced to group with a bunch of idiots if there is no one online you'd like to group with (friends, members of your guild...).
Hardly. Those are so far away from the consumer market, the home entertainment industry will have to proclaim about 5 other formats dead befoe they finally hit...
Even then, they would still be more expensive due to the cost of the media. They wouldn't wipe out HD-DVD/Bluray for a long time.
Plus, no one is ever going to sell you something with so many films on it for a accepptable price soon. You'll probably have to download said movies yourself (from some kind of download service) or copy them from DVD/HD-DVD/Bluray/whatever as soon as those holo things become available (and there is affordable hardware that allows you to store data on them).
That list is bullshit. Check official sources before making claims like that. SoT doesn't have SF, but some version of SecuRom.
And I would assume that the drive was fucked on arrival.
Well, the combat in SoT really was very repetitive, but there wasn't that much of it, so it didn't really annoy me.
They improved it in WW though, with the two-weapon fighting system, and a bunch of new moves. If you (generic you) still saw the same move over and over again in WW, it was your own damn fault.
In TT, if you use speed kill often, you really see the same animations over and over again.
Who modded this troll up?
Sands of Time doesn't use StarForce. Warrior Within doesn't. Only Two Thrones does.
Besides, stories of StarForce damaging CD drives are either just rumors, or, as in this case, outright lies.
This is, in this context, bullshit. Not only disabled players would profit if they brought back the customization. It isn't any different from other additions/changes they make to the game, it is not like the customization features are specifically for diabled people.
While I agree with the content of your post, saying that "Nobody is talking about Unix here" seems to be a bad choice of words regarding all the comments above yours...
Please moderate the parent of this post and all others who hurried to correct people who made jokes about the GO TO statement (-1, No Sense Of Humor). While I agree that the joke is obvious, there is no reason to mod the first one who made it Redundant.
Of course, the other posts with the same joke should be modded down.
BTW, am I the only who thinks that posts like the parent are far more annoying than the about 70 GO TO posts, that probably have appeared while I'm writing this?
Of course those shirts aren't exactly what you would call "mature". But they are, in my opinion (and apparently not only in mine) quite funny. Those shirts aren't supposed to make some great argument, and prove your moral superiority. It's not like there was any point in trying to do this, anyway, with a lunatic like Jack on the other side.
There are many ways to make actual arguments, state facts and validate your viewpoint on the issue. A shirt isn't one of them. Until it is, you need to loosen up a little.
Slashdot Mirror
You seem to have some difficulty understanding what freedom of speech actually means.
Here's a hint: Congress shall make no law...
People telling you to shut the fuck up when you are spouting bullshit does not in any way interfere with your right to free speech. In fact, that is just those other people exercising that exact right.
Travelling to and from Switzerland from the rest of Europe was never a problem. They did have controls on their borders, though, so, theoretically you had to have a passport (though they rarely bothered checking). Now that they are part of the Schengen treaty, there will be no more routine controls on the borders between Switzerland and the rest of the Schengen countries, and you won't need a passport to go there anymore.
Please tell me you are joking. Discoveries of subitutes or other technical breakthroughs do not necessarily follow from rising prices. Economics isn't science, and your beloved free market will not always fix everything.
If you're talking about the circumcision issue, I really do not see your point. Whose privacy is being infringed upon if you prohibit circumcision of infants and child without medical necessity?
I could see how one might argue that you are infringing upon the parents rights, but even in that case, it's not really a privacy issue in my opinion.
Besides, I can only see that argument working if you see a child as the personal property of its parents with which they can do as they please. To me, that doesn't make any sense. After all, parents aren't allowed to abuse their kids in a myriad of other ways, so why should this be any different?
The materials are all derived from recycling old Newtons and glued together with the tears of Apple fanatics upset about the $200 price drop.
Don't talk about the secret ingredient!
His predecessor from the other side of the political spectrum, Otto Schily, was just as bad as Wolfgang Schaeuble.
Wait... wait.
Other side of the political spectrum? What's that supposed to mean? Schäuble is CDU, Schily was SPD. They're pretty much the same these days, except for some minor issues and the cheap attempts by the SPD to gain back a bit of favor with the people who traditionally always voted for them.
I don't believe for a second that they would do anything radically different if they were in charge.
You know, I really hate the FDP (liberals) for their twisted ideas about economic issues but they are probably our only hope for ever getting a minister of the interior who isn't a paranoid right wing nut.
Something doesn't need to actually HARM someone in every instance in order to be illegal.
And that is one of the main reasons why your current "justice system" is so fucked up (not that this wouldn't apply to other countries as well - such retarded laws exist in a lot of places).
The additional weight of the fuel could be a problem if he did it like that, tho. Probably wouldn't make for the most pleasant landing.
In fact, it does not work at all. AFAIK, it is well proven that most people won't be kept from committing a crime by the prospect of an incredibly disproportionate punishment.
You listed some of the best examples yourself: Just because you still have the death penalty, there aren't any less murders being committed in the States than elsewhere.
Besides, even if it worked, is this theory acceptable? By its logic, as I understand it, every criminal would have to be executed, probably with some torture beforehand. That should deter most people from committing any crimes at all, right?
Now, lets assume that this would actually work to some extent. Imagine what ridiculously small thing people would get killed for. I honestly find this idea rather scary.
PS: Please don't bitch about any grammar or spelling mistakes, it's early in the morning here and I haven't had my coffee yet.
The AC's post wasn't directed at you, but at its parent. I guess ACs are not the only ones confused around here...
I will monitor her IM and her e-mail and everything else she does like a parent SHOULD do If you need to monitor your kids internet activities in order to make sure they don't watch porn or violent imagery, you have already made some huge mistakes raising them. You should be able to show some trust...
No. He will only read your last statement after he has read the rest of your post. By then, he will already have been offended. Thus, your apology isn't in advance any more. Now, if you had put it at the beginning of your post, it would have been in advance.
There's got to be a higher evil power behind that piece of crap. No human deserves to be blamed for Win ME.
[...]Where is the line between "stereotyping an entire culture as bad guys", versus "all the bad guys you face are from this culture"?[...] I don't know. But GUN does neither. Not all the Indians in the game are "bad guys". Later in the game, they become your allies. I seem to remember the main character being indian (half-indian?) as well, though I'm not sure. And in GUN, you'll almost certainly kill more whites than indians, if you actually play through the game.
I was replying to the ppl who kept claiming that no MMORPG should ever, ever include the possibility of soloing/that using Henchies in GW "defeats the purpose of playing an MMORPG" (hint: GW isn't even an actual MMORPG). In this case, we are apparently facing horrid game design, judging by the points you mentioned. Of course, I wasn't in the beta, so I don't really know. If it forces me to play with PUGs, I definitely won't touch it, tho.
Why? There's still PvP. There is still questing with my guild. Only because henchmen are available doesn't mean you don't play with other humans anymore. It just means you aren't forced to group with a bunch of idiots if there is no one online you'd like to group with (friends, members of your guild...).
Hardly. Those are so far away from the consumer market, the home entertainment industry will have to proclaim about 5 other formats dead befoe they finally hit...
Even then, they would still be more expensive due to the cost of the media. They wouldn't wipe out HD-DVD/Bluray for a long time.
Plus, no one is ever going to sell you something with so many films on it for a accepptable price soon. You'll probably have to download said movies yourself (from some kind of download service) or copy them from DVD/HD-DVD/Bluray/whatever as soon as those holo things become available (and there is affordable hardware that allows you to store data on them).
That list is bullshit. Check official sources before making claims like that. SoT doesn't have SF, but some version of SecuRom. And I would assume that the drive was fucked on arrival.
Well, the combat in SoT really was very repetitive, but there wasn't that much of it, so it didn't really annoy me. They improved it in WW though, with the two-weapon fighting system, and a bunch of new moves. If you (generic you) still saw the same move over and over again in WW, it was your own damn fault. In TT, if you use speed kill often, you really see the same animations over and over again.
Who modded this troll up? Sands of Time doesn't use StarForce. Warrior Within doesn't. Only Two Thrones does. Besides, stories of StarForce damaging CD drives are either just rumors, or, as in this case, outright lies.
This is, in this context, bullshit. Not only disabled players would profit if they brought back the customization. It isn't any different from other additions/changes they make to the game, it is not like the customization features are specifically for diabled people.
While I agree with the content of your post, saying that "Nobody is talking about Unix here" seems to be a bad choice of words regarding all the comments above yours...
Please moderate the parent of this post and all others who hurried to correct people who made jokes about the GO TO statement (-1, No Sense Of Humor). While I agree that the joke is obvious, there is no reason to mod the first one who made it Redundant.
Of course, the other posts with the same joke should be modded down.
BTW, am I the only who thinks that posts like the parent are far more annoying than the about 70 GO TO posts, that probably have appeared while I'm writing this?
It regenerated.
Of course those shirts aren't exactly what you would call "mature". But they are, in my opinion (and apparently not only in mine) quite funny. Those shirts aren't supposed to make some great argument, and prove your moral superiority. It's not like there was any point in trying to do this, anyway, with a lunatic like Jack on the other side. There are many ways to make actual arguments, state facts and validate your viewpoint on the issue. A shirt isn't one of them. Until it is, you need to loosen up a little.